HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Anaheim Ducks
Notices

Would You Make a Run at Miller?

View Poll Results: Would You Deal for Ryan Miller?
Yes, Make the Move 26 40.63%
No, Lets stick with hiller/fasth 29 45.31%
On the fence at the moment 9 14.06%
Voters: 64. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-21-2013, 12:00 PM
  #26
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
There's no reason whatsoever to expect with Miller that even a long contract would be at a "reasonable price". Just wishful conjecture that he would take less to live here.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 12:01 PM
  #27
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
I don't want him for 4 years. 3 is even pushing it. I wouldn't insult him by only offering 2.

That's ignoring the fact that to get a short contract like that it won't be at a "reasonable price."
I'm guessing making no offer would be quite insulting itself.

No harm in offering 6 mil a year fpr three years, and decent chance he goes for it. That's reasonable all around.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 12:34 PM
  #28
AngelDuck
Registered User
 
AngelDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,620
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
There's no reason whatsoever to expect with Miller that even a long contract would be at a "reasonable price". Just wishful conjecture that he would take less to live here.
Yeah, I agree with this. I've always found the notion that he'd take a discount to play in Anaheim faulty at best. He'd be awesome for the stretch run, but we'd have to give up assets, and I don't like doing that for a rental.

AngelDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 12:46 PM
  #29
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelDuck View Post
Yeah, I agree with this. I've always found the notion that he'd take a discount to play in Anaheim faulty at best.
Honestly, I don't even think that notion is too likely to be the faulty bit. I mean, the rumors around him wanting to be near his actress-girlfriend on the West Coast have been around forever. There aren't any openings with San Jose or LA, or even Phoenix, Denver or Vancouver. He's also made a lot of money over the last few years already, and would probably enjoy playing for a good team, in a nice place. I really wouldn't be surprised if he took a fair bit less to be here. But I do agree in that I think the combined discount over money and term he'd be able to get here will make it too tough a pill to swallow for him. At 33 years, there's considerable risk in agreeing to a 2/3-year deal. He's a top-rated goalie now. He could get paid accordingly for five years. Who knows if he's still that highly rated and healthy after a shorter contract. You can never expect a player to take such a gamble. Crazier things have happened, but it's a big stretch. Would love to be wrong, though.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 01:34 PM
  #30
douglast5
PS3 GMC Comish
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,268
vCash: 797
I picked stick with Hiller/Fasth

In terms of importance to this team the goal tending is probably #3.

1# Top pair Dman. Even more important if Beauch is missing time.
2# Fixing PP (13%) and PK (75%). PP started picking up some, but 2 PP goals against lastnight against a terrible PP.
3# Improving in net.

You can have a good shot at a cup with strong offense and defense but a midpack goalie. But we definitly need to get a top Dman and we are not going to win anything with those special teams numbers and it has started to really hurt us of late.

I'd rather use any picks/players to upgrade at D then get a ufa goalie. Anderson looked good in his 6 games against bottom teams. Theres nothing proven about that, he could definitely be a backup but in no way has he proven to be a NHL starter.

douglast5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 04:31 PM
  #31
KEEROLE Vatanen
Failures Of Fenwick
 
KEEROLE Vatanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16,263
vCash: 500
yes no question, he's better than both our current guys. since the forum doesn't seem to be in favor of rolling with freddy, this seems like a good option

KEEROLE Vatanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 04:44 PM
  #32
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 24,171
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by KEEROLE Vatanen View Post
yes no question, he's better than both our current guys. since the forum doesn't seem to be in favor of rolling with freddy, this seems like a good option
I think the issue is more about rolling with a goaltender who has all of 7 NHL games.

Fasth seems to have trouble staying healthy, and he hasn't played all that many games either. Moving Hiller means moving the only goalie we have who has played more than 40 games. That's a decision that could cost us a chance at the playoffs, if it doesn't work out.

If we're going to move a goalie to make room for Andersen, well, personally, I'd rather it be Fasth. The problem is that Hiller is a UFA at the end of the season and Fasth isn't.

__________________
"Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice" -- Polonius
Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 04:45 PM
  #33
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KEEROLE Vatanen View Post
yes no question, he's better than both our current guys. since the forum doesn't seem to be in favor of rolling with freddy, this seems like a good option
I'm not sure they're as against it as you think. When I floated it up earlier most were wary, but not a lot of vehement opposition.

I'm all for it.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 04:47 PM
  #34
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 24,171
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by snarktacular View Post
I'm not sure they're as against it as you think. When I floated it up earlier most were wary, but not a lot of vehement opposition.

I'm all for it.
For me, it's more about who is moved to make room, and having a contingency if it doesn't work.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 04:53 PM
  #35
Paul4587
Registered User
 
Paul4587's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 13,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
I think the issue is more about rolling with a goaltender who has all of 7 NHL games.

Fasth seems to have trouble staying healthy, and he hasn't played all that many games either. Moving Hiller means moving the only goalie we have who has played more than 40 games. That's a decision that could cost us a chance at the playoffs, if it doesn't work out.

If we're going to move a goalie to make room for Andersen, well, personally, I'd rather it be Fasth. The problem is that Hiller is a UFA at the end of the season and Fasth isn't.
I agree with this stance entirely. The question is if we move Fasth can we get someone to play the 1A/1B role with Andersen next year in the offseason. If we can then I'd be comfortable moving Fasth and rolling with a Hiller/Andersen duo for the rest of the year.

Paul4587 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 05:02 PM
  #36
KEEROLE Vatanen
Failures Of Fenwick
 
KEEROLE Vatanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
I think the issue is more about rolling with a goaltender who has all of 7 NHL games.

Fasth seems to have trouble staying healthy, and he hasn't played all that many games either. Moving Hiller means moving the only goalie we have who has played more than 40 games. That's a decision that could cost us a chance at the playoffs, if it doesn't work out.

If we're going to move a goalie to make room for Andersen, well, personally, I'd rather it be Fasth. The problem is that Hiller is a UFA at the end of the season and Fasth isn't.
then he needs to keep playing, he has earned it and the ducks need to see how he plays over a larger sample before deciding what to do, if thats your position i have no qualms with it, my problem is rolling with the current duo which isn't good enough

KEEROLE Vatanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 05:08 PM
  #37
Ducksgo*
#EtemUp
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Lakewood CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,898
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ducksgo*
Two reasons why I voted no.

1) World class goal tender with Gibson is waiting in the pipeline. With Miller wanting a renewal contract, we don't know how long the term would be.

2) asking price?? How much? If the costs is what I am assuming likely high prospect plus picks since they are rebuilding. I say no to that instantly

Ducksgo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 05:22 PM
  #38
Sojourn
Global Moderator
Where's the kaboom?
 
Sojourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 24,171
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by KEEROLE Vatanen View Post
then he needs to keep playing, he has earned it and the ducks need to see how he plays over a larger sample before deciding what to do, if thats your position i have no qualms with it, my problem is rolling with the current duo which isn't good enough
Which only happens if Anaheim moves a goaltender. It's circular.

Sojourn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 05:29 PM
  #39
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
There's no reason whatsoever to expect with Miller that even a long contract would be at a "reasonable price". Just wishful conjecture that he would take less to live here.
You assume that a reasonable price comes at a discount. The market for netminders has been well established, and 7 is the highest number. Given all considerations, 6 is probably what he would expect and for what he brings to the table, well worthwhile from our perspective. Only issue would be term.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 06:03 PM
  #40
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibsons Finest View Post
You assume that a reasonable price comes at a discount. The market for netminders has been well established, and 7 is the highest number. Given all considerations, 6 is probably what he would expect and for what he brings to the table, well worthwhile from our perspective. Only issue would be term.
There are several players who should get decent raises this year. Carrying ~25M between 1C, 1R, and G1/G2 is potentially a huge issue.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 06:36 PM
  #41
snarktacular
Moderator
Ducks tank is on!
 
snarktacular's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 16,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sojourn View Post
I think the issue is more about rolling with a goaltender who has all of 7 NHL games.

Fasth seems to have trouble staying healthy, and he hasn't played all that many games either. Moving Hiller means moving the only goalie we have who has played more than 40 games. That's a decision that could cost us a chance at the playoffs, if it doesn't work out.

If we're going to move a goalie to make room for Andersen, well, personally, I'd rather it be Fasth. The problem is that Hiller is a UFA at the end of the season and Fasth isn't.
I get where you're coming from, and I'm normally with you.

My stance, though, is that while Fasth and Andersen are two rather large question marks with a potential for moderate or high rewards, respectively, Hiller is a weakness.

When you get to that point, you don't have much to lose by rolling the dice.

That's also where the Miller scenario holds some promise.

snarktacular is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 09:50 PM
  #42
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
There are several players who should get decent raises this year. Carrying ~25M between 1C, 1R, and G1/G2 is potentially a huge issue.
We're carrying 24 right now, I really don't see the issue. Even with guys getting raises, still a lot of money to go around. Miller at 6 million with Andersen as hia backup gives us 7 million in goaltending, exact same as we have right now. Spending 7 million between two goaltenders is pretty much the going rate, it's not exactly breaking the bank.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 10:17 PM
  #43
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibsons Finest View Post
We're carrying 24 right now, I really don't see the issue. Even with guys getting raises, still a lot of money to go around. Miller at 6 million with Andersen as hia backup gives us 7 million in goaltending, exact same as we have right now. Spending 7 million between two goaltenders is pretty much the going rate, it's not exactly breaking the bank.
You skipped the part where we got rid of Fasth.

Edit - and also the part where the Ducks were probably planning on budgeting 3M or so to the position with Fasth and Andersen when they signed Getzlaf and Perry.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 10:23 PM
  #44
Emerald Duck
Registered User
 
Emerald Duck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 780
vCash: 500
Does anyone know how close we are to 50 contracts in the organization ? We may need to move one of our young forwards (DSP/Maroon/Laganiere/Wagner/other) in a package for Miller to keep our contract flexibility.

I'd trade Fasth + young forward + 2nd for Miller.

Let Miller and Hiller compete for the rest of the year in net. I assume that we will try to re-sign Miller ($5.5-$6M for 3 years), and use a Miller/Andersen combo next year. Hiller will walk as a UFA. Gibson continues to develop in Norfolk with the majority of the starts.

Fasth provides Buffalo with an experienced 1B who is under contract at a fair price through next season. If we trade Hiller instead of Fasth for Miller, then we have a Miller/Fasth tandem next year that may be too expensive as well as block both Andersen's and Gibson's developments.

Swapping Hiller + 1st rd pick for Miller doesn't make sense if we will be unable to pursue a contract for Miller. I'd rather keep the pick myself.

Emerald Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 10:33 PM
  #45
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducks DVM View Post
You skipped the part where we got rid of Fasth.

Edit - and also the part where the Ducks were probably planning on budgeting 3M or so to the position with Fasth and Andersen when they signed Getzlaf and Perry.
I thought that much was implied. If Miller's brought in, Fasth can go wherever, he's not needed anymore.

And I love how it's wishful thinking that Miller would take a discount to go here, but it's considered likely that the Ducks want to spend less on the most important position in hockey than any other NHL team. I'm not saying they won't end up doing it if they have confidence in Fasth and Andersen, but to mandate that is completely outrageous.

Also, not saying that thinking Miller will come cheap isn't wishful thinking, but it's the exact same thing as your statement, except there's actual logic behind it.

Gibsons Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 10:54 PM
  #46
Eddie Shack
RIP KevFist
 
Eddie Shack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibsons Finest View Post
I thought that much was implied. If Miller's brought in, Fasth can go wherever, he's not needed anymore.

And I love how it's wishful thinking that Miller would take a discount to go here, but it's considered likely that the Ducks want to spend less on the most important position in hockey than any other NHL team. I'm not saying they won't end up doing it if they have confidence in Fasth and Andersen, but to mandate that is completely outrageous.

Also, not saying that thinking Miller will come cheap isn't wishful thinking, but it's the exact same thing as your statement, except there's actual logic behind it.
Would that be the same logic that dictated Perry and Getzlaf would sign cheap, here, too?

Miller won't give BM anything close to the deal BM would want. And, you just don't go out and sign an expensive goalie to a long term contract when you have the talent we have on ELC or 1st year deals. The good thing about having Andersen and Gibson is they look like real studs. The bad thing is, we are going to have to risk playing them to find out. It makes no sense to sign a guy like Miller. But I would definitely be interested in him as a rental if the price were right.

Eddie Shack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2013, 10:58 PM
  #47
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,184
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibsons Finest View Post
I thought that much was implied. If Miller's brought in, Fasth can go wherever, he's not needed anymore.

And I love how it's wishful thinking that Miller would take a discount to go here, but it's considered likely that the Ducks want to spend less on the most important position in hockey than any other NHL team. I'm not saying they won't end up doing it if they have confidence in Fasth and Andersen, but to mandate that is completely outrageous.

Also, not saying that thinking Miller will come cheap isn't wishful thinking, but it's the exact same thing as your statement, except there's actual logic behind it.
Washington, San Jose, Chicago, Tampa Bay, and Colorado all spend 4-5M on their goalie tandems - because they have young cost controlled players. The Ducks clearly intended to ship out Hiller and go with Fasth and Andersen. Their salaries add up to 3.8M give or take, and they're cost controlled for quite some time - not ridiculously lower than quite a few contenders. It's completely logical to think they'd want to keep player costs as low as possible with the Getzlaf and Perry salaries. Your position of them being willing to keep spending as they are isn't illogical, but it also isn't based on anything other than sheer conjecture with zero facts to base it on.

This is Miller's last major contract. It's very logical to think that his desire for term and salary won't match up with Anaheim's situation. Anaheim may not want to be stuck with another Giguere situation, and Miller may not want to be looking for a new contract in 2-3 years. Plausible AND logical. Try to make a point without a personal attack, especially when it's completely off-base.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 04:45 PM
  #48
Vipers31
Moderator
Advanced Stagnostic
 
Vipers31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bergisch Gladbach
Country: Germany
Posts: 10,936
vCash: 500
I will just put this in here (via yahoo):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller on Lundqvist's extension:
"I thought it was actually lower than he was probably going for," Miller said. "I anticipate with the TV deals and such, the cap is going to keep going up. Maybe it will seem like a pretty average price down the line."
Well, even if he's not entirely wrong, and if he saw himself as merely average, he doesn't exactly seem to be positioning himself for a discount. Not that that should ever be expected.

Vipers31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 06:03 PM
  #49
DarthYenik
Registered User
 
DarthYenik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Orange County, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,105
vCash: 500
I think trading Hiller would be foolish. I think trading any of the goalies right now, unless they can get an incredible return, is foolish.

DarthYenik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 06:04 PM
  #50
Terry Yake
Registered User
 
Terry Yake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 2,098
vCash: 500
if they want to trade a goalie, it should be fasth

and if they do trade fasth, it should definitely not be for another goalie. there are way too many goalies in this organization

Terry Yake is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:28 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.